This is the explanation closest to what I was thinking beforehand. The problem seems like one of the difference between {the difficulty of predicting an event} and {the likelihood of correctly reporting an observed event}. I think Dagon’s argument about Map vs. Territory is a good one too.
Question for you, though… please define “ghost”? I have a feeling your definition is different than mine because I find events such as
certain environmental factors like (low-level poisoning from radon, carbon monoxide, et al; certain acoustic effects; certain architectural events such as uneven expansion due to temperature changes; &c.) cause minor hallucinations or illusions resulting in supersocial minds like those in humans perceiving “people” where there are none
very much more likely than
something of a person that exists independent of the usual corporeal form and (typically) despite the loss of that form is detectable by an uninformed and objective observer.
It’s a good point, though. I think minor hallucinations and illusions area much more probable explanation for ghosts—and lots of other alleged paranormal/supernatural phenomena—than anything authentic.
This is the explanation closest to what I was thinking beforehand. The problem seems like one of the difference between {the difficulty of predicting an event} and {the likelihood of correctly reporting an observed event}. I think Dagon’s argument about Map vs. Territory is a good one too.
Question for you, though… please define “ghost”? I have a feeling your definition is different than mine because I find events such as
very much more likely than
EDIT: formatted for better readability
I was joking about ghosts… :)
It’s a good point, though. I think minor hallucinations and illusions area much more probable explanation for ghosts—and lots of other alleged paranormal/supernatural phenomena—than anything authentic.